Will The Jones Street Mob maintain its iron grip on state GOP?

22 thoughts on “Will The Jones Street Mob maintain its iron grip on state GOP?”

1. I have to send you a new photo.

   I can understand the concern here. However as the state and the GOP grows
   the Executive Committee keeps growing. It’s well more than 500 people now I think and it struggles to meet quorum. The size needs to be reduced to keep it a functioning relevant body.

   However, perhaps some kind of compromise can keep the ratio of grassroots activists to legislators the same.

   1. Sorry, Dallas. This doesn’t read NOR sound very enticing. Do you TRUST insiders in this party? My belief is, NO GRASSROOTS do! And with good reason.

      .Do you truly believe the state convention has been managed well under the current authorities?

   2. The reason it stuggles to meet quorum is because of scheduling meetings just before Christmas, a time when most people have a whole lot of other things going on.. This question is whether that is just incompetence or whether it is calculated and deliberate..

2. It’s SAFE to say most of them are more scared of Phil Berger and his crew than they are of their own constituents? Seriously?

   That’s putting it mildly.

   The only way the legislators will be more scared of their constituents than they are of the Berger Mafia is if they’re confronted, questioned, embarrassed – then heckled and boo’d off the stage in their own district by their constituents. But most conservatives will not behave in this manner.

   No, we’ll just let those who are supposed to be representing us be pulled around by the nose by King Berger. That’s nicer.

3. The first time I served on the NCGOP Plan of Organization committee, back in 1983, the committee came within one vote of removing all legislators as automatic members of the Executive Committee. In those days there were a lot fewer of them and most had come up through party ranks. There was also a whole lot less central control by the legislative leadership. Even then there was a big appetite to remove them. If not for an impassioned plea by State Rep. Reid Poovey (R-Catawba) calling the legislators “the frontline troops”, the vote in the committee to remove them would have passed.

   Now, we see many more legislators, who make up a larger part of the Executive Committee, a large number of them had little or nothing to do with the party organization before being elected to the legislature, and the domination by legislative leadership is huge. As Speaker, Thom Tillis used to even call House Caucus meetings an hour before GOP ExCom meetings at the same location to dragoon members into coming if there was something on the NCGOP agenda he wanted to throw his weight around on. There is a whole lot more reason now than there was in 1983 to reconsider whether legislators should be automatic members of the ExCom.

   One of the most imperative reforms the party needs is to revisit this issue.

4. Another huge problem with this Plan of Organization draft is that it makes it more difficult to censure wayward politicians, as the Central Committee did to Richard Burr and the state convention did more recently with Thom Tillis. It also deletes the provisions to hold elected officials guilty of party disloyalty, as was done by the ExCom to Richard Morgan and as should be done to Phil Berger for his flagrant endorsement of a liberal Democrat judge against a conservative Republican challenger.

   This is important with the growing number of RINOs or Undocumented Democrats. The Wyoming GOP censured LIz Cheney. The Alaska GOP censured Lisa Murkowski. The Oklahoma GOP “withdrew its support” from Jim Lankford. We censured Thom Tillis. If sleazy politicians want to prostitute themselves to the special interests or the Democrats, the grassroots party base needs to be able to express their disapproval.

   This draft is a protection racket on wayward leftist Republican politicians. It needs to be defeated.

5. One could take a page from the example set by alienated conservatives in southern Granville county. They organized and threw their RINO out of the statehouse skipping that part of their ballot or voting Libertarian, breaking the supermajority in the process. Like Reagan said, if you can’t make them see the light, let ‘em feel the heat.

6. I realize that most of you will disagree with this, but it should never be easy for a party to punish the elected officials it is charged with electing.

   The primary is the proper place for GOP voters review the positions, experiences and voting records of its candidates/elected officials. The “party” and its structure has only one role. Turn out GOP voters to elect the nominated candidates. It is not a policy making body
   nor is it in the business of punishing and making weaker its elected officials.

   If the Exec Committee is supposed to do a better job of representing “grassroots” NCGOP members, letting the committee grow to the point it’ can’t function does nobody any good

   1. Dallas, the NCGOP state executive committee is supposed to be the governing body of the party which is engaged in making meaningful decisions. When I first became a member of it in the Spring of 1974 that is how it functioned, and continued to do so for the first two decades I served on it. State chairmen brought their proposals to the committee for approval, usually verbally but I do recall former Chairman Bob Bradshaw bringing a 40 plus page written campaign plan for the 1986 election before the executive committee for approval.

      We have lost that bottom-up way of governing our party in the last two to three decades and it now functions from the top down, like the Democrats. That weakens our party. Our executive committee has been neutered over that time period, and we need to reverse that.

      For a functioning executive committee, quality matters more than quantity. It needs experienced and politically savvy members who understand politics and campaigning. The biggest resevoir of such talent is in the members at large, often former county chairmen, district officers, and other who have been around the track quire a few times. This is a very counterproductive place to try to cut if you want an executive committee that will function the way it is supposed to.

      One group of members whose background has changed dramatically since I have been an ExCom member has been the legislators. Fifty years ago, there were fewer of them and most had worked their way up through the party ranks, giving them quite a bit of political knowlege. They were also very independent minded and not led around by the nose by the leadership. That has all changed, and now legislators often get to their positions without having much or any experience in the party. Many of them are now little more than straw men for the leadership. That adds significantly to the party’s “top – down” problem. If we are going to cut members, that is the place to do it.

      I would note that we still have some legislators who have similar backgrounds to those of fifty years ago who are valued members within our party organization and contribute signicantly to the management of our party organization. We have a few I could name in my Congressinal district. They are now, however, the exception rather than the rule.

      As to disciplining wayward politicians, I would remind you that most of us active in politics are motivated by the set of principles that our party represents. When we have politicians who routinely go against those principles, it tends to make people lose interest in participating. That is why it is important to party success that we have mechanisms to keep wayward politicians in line.

      1. Let me give an example of what we are seeing with some of our new legislators.

         A good friend of mine who was heavily involved in politics here in my home county, having served in roles including as county GOP chairman, city councilwoman, and county commissioner but now lives in another part of the state, called me prior to the election to discuss politics. We talked mostly about the big races, but she mentioned going to a local GOP function and meeting a legislative candidate in her district. The candidate seemed to have little background in politics, could not articulate any set of principles or issues and openly told those attending that she had met with the leadership and they said they wanted her to vote the way they advised her and she had agreed to that. My friend’s reaction was that the Democrat was so bad she still had to vote for that GOP candidate but she would probably puke when she did it. That legislative candidate is a good example of what we do NOT need voting on party policy on the executive committee.

   2. You are LOSING this battle and regardless of ANY comments you make. Realize that?
      THIS PARTY IS TRASH!

      UNLESS strides are made, massive headways made b/w not and 2026 at the state level, I’ll be DAM*** if I vote for this party. I will NOT be dictated to WHO I have to support yr after yr and election after election.

      We’ve ELECTED NOBODY (based on our esteemed party’s nominees) in DC THAT IS WORTH ONE DAM*****…NOT ONE. From the east to the west.

      And the senate?? You defending Tillis, Burr? Burr sits in a seat, about it.

      Can you DEFEND our COS candidates and their campaigns?
      Defend Berger, Moore?

      We HAVEN’T WON the governor’s seat since when? Not really been competitive, yet Forrest HAD to run b/c of Sue. Robinson, who knows????

      I”m not personally attacking you at all. I’m pointing out what I see as avg Joe in the NCGOP.
      I’m DONE with the party, leadership, mgt and operations. AND HAVING THEM as the “HEAD” and decision-makers b/c they are elected is NOT going to sell. If anything, they should be excluded.

      1. Budd (not Burr twice).

   3. Behold! A convolution dealer: Prized hires by the establishment in dealing with the masses.

7. This excrement sandwich of a POO also embeds crooked electronic voting for our conventions. Remember what an absolute disaster that was in 2023? That alone is enough to vote down this monstrosity.

   This draft gives the convention chair the power to determine what method of voting is used and lists electronic voting as an option. It has window dressing about being tested, but sets no standards for such testing meaning the provision is meaningless. If the convention charirman decides on corrupt and non-transparent electronic voting, it is a done deal because the POO cannot be suspended like convention rules could be. And with sleazy Billy Miller, who fools a lot of people with his convincing facade of “fairmess” but is really a tool of the establishment, in the chair, he is going to do exactly what the establishment wants.

   What is REALLY needed is a provision in the POO that PROHIBITS electronic voting. Republicans do not want that crap at the polling place on election day, so why the hell do we want to tolerate it at our conventions?

8. Steve 50 years ago, we did not control anything and after 1974 every GOP state legislator could fit into a phone book.

   Comparing that “leadership” to the people who run the most powerful branch of NC Government today is not a meaningful comparison

   I mean let’s not forget these legislators cut a bunch of taxes, passed voter ID, created a universal school choice program …

   1. AND worked lock, stock and barrel WITH coop on green energy, medicade, spending, masking, complete state shut down (only southern state and last to open).

      Certainly, you are NOT touting our Gen Assembly as something to embrace or celebrate?

   2. In 1972, we elected 15 state senators and 35 state representatives, so those numbers were not that small. 1974 was a particularly bad year due to both Watergate and even more so a fractured GOP organization from the vicious fight within the party in 1973 between the Holshouser faction and the conservatives which left the party bitterly divided. But even with smaller numbers of legislators, in 1983, the Plan of Organization Committee came within one vote of recommending taking all of the legislators off of the state executive committee as automatic members (ex officio with vote).. That was even at a time when most legislators came up through party ranks and were independent minded instead of so many being led around by the nose by the leadership.

      The reason we have so many legislators today is because of the hard work of Republican activists. Yes, our majorities have done some really good things, but they have also badly disappointed many GOP activists with things like NC’s own Green New Deal, putting men in ladies restrooms by repeal of HB2, and giving us the Obamacare Medicaid expansion. For many activists, it has truly been a mixed bag, and what is really needed is more party influence on the legislature, not more legislative influence driven by the leadership into the party structure. It is the leadership, not the rank and file legislators, that has driven those issues that disappoint the GOP base.

      I have previously suggested and continue to believe in a middle ground that would give legislative input into the party structure at a more appropriate level and tend to get the type of legislators involved who more fully engage with the party structure. That would be to hold caucuses at district GOP conventions of all legislators who are in attendance as delegates to nominate two of t heir members from each district to be elected to reserved seats for legislators on the state executive committee. We only have a handful of legislators who attend district or state executive committee meetings unless the leadership calls them out for something the leadership wants. The ones who participate regularly are the ones who should have voting seats. At the last state executive committee meeting, you could count the legislators present on one hand, but let the leadership have a dog in a fight and there will be a massive turnout of legislators. That is not the way a party should operate.

9. At the beginning of the 1975 session, The GOP had 1 State Senator
   and 9 State House members

   1. Yes, Dallas, that was the result of the 1974 election. We faced fallout over Watergate and even worse, a horribly divided party after the Holshouser wing went on a jihad to drive all the conservatives out of it in the 1973 set of party conventions and then followed it up with primary attacks on conservative legislators in the 1974 primaries. I served on the Credentials Committee of the 1973 state convention so I had a front row seat on all the shananigans. They also took over all of the state auxilliary organizations except the College Republicans.

      What happened with the 9th district party, where I was active at the time, shows the hardball that was played in 1973. Jim Martin had just been elected to Congress in the 9th district, and the district chariman, Jack Waring of Iredell County was a conservative and close Martin supporter. When the Holshouser people geared up to take Jack out, Congressman Martin called Holshouser personally and told him that if Holshouser went after Martin’s disrtict chairman he was going to have Martin actively involved to stop it. They backed off of that one. The only other conservative to survive, and narrow;y, as a district chairman was Eddie Armfield in the 5th district, who was known as a close ally of incumbent Congressman “Vinegar Bend” Mizell but had to fight it out on his own because Mizell was looking at running for US Senate and did not want to get caught up in intraparty battles.

      If you look at the election immediately before that, held in 1972, with the legislators taking office in 1973, we had 15 senators and 35 representatives. After the 1974 debacle, the party unified again under compromise state chairman Bob Shaw and started rebuilding.

      My point is that even with a smaller number of legislators, the State Plan of Organization committee in 1983 came within one vote of making a recommendation to take away their automatic state ExCom seats. That was even at a time when the backgrounds of most legislators gave more justification than today of them serving on the ExCom.

      I also notice that in an earlier post you put the term grassroots in quotation marks which seems to show a distain for party activists

10. Steve: Why in the world would
    you want a party where the people you are dedicated to electing are at arms length. ?
    A healthy party needs a robust base of elected officials, grassroots activists, conservative consultants, fundraisers etc

    That is the hallmark of a successful majority political party

    1. Arms length? What I have suggested is that each Congressional district during their district convention have a caucus of legislators who attend and select two of them to fill dedicated seats on the NCGOP ExCom. That way there is a connection but it is with legislators who actually engage with the party and are more likely to think for themselves rather than be dictated to by the leadership. Fifty years ago, most legislators came up through party ranks but today a great many of them don’t, and without that background, why should they be serving on a party governing body in the first place?

       Why should any party want these big blocks of votes controlled by the legislative leadership? While we still have some more independent minded legislators, far too many of them will do what they are told, and that is partly because they do not engage with party activists within the party structure.

       You also seem to think that the legislative leadership is essential to electing a majority. It isn’t. Our first legislative majority since 1896 was achieved in 1994. I was myself heavily involved in that election, both as a state party officer and central committee member and as a candidate myself for State Senate in the old 9th district. We won the House and ended up with 24 Senate seats, with a couple of very narrow misses, one of them being my race against the Senate Banking Committee chairman Sen. Ed Warren (D-Pitt). The party structure, then headed by Jack Hawke, the best chairman the NCGOP has had in my lifetime, carried the whole load from recruiting the legislative candidates to providing campaign support. The legislative leadership was a nice cheering section but with very little role in candidate selection or support. Hawke worked through the district party chairmen on candidate recruitment who turned around and worked with their county chairmen to find and encourage good candidates. Jack then raised the money to give candidates proper support. The result was putting Rep. Harold Brubaker (R-Randolph) into the House Speakers chair. A shift of a handful of votes in a couple of Senate races would have given us that chamber, too.

       The 1994 election shows the proper role of a political party in a legislative election, at least when you have a grassroots oriented party where the power flows from the bottom up instead of the top down. That is what we used to have in the NCGOP, and what we need to get back.

       The party does have a huge role in policy, and that is essential to motivating both volunteers and contributors, both of whom support the GOP because they like its positions on issues, not because they are enamored with elephants. That is why we adopt a platform, something that should have a meaning for our elected officials. If they read the platform and don’t agree with significant parts of it, maybe they should be running with a different party. How many times have we heard refugees from the Democrat Party say “I didn’t leave the Democrat Party, the Democrat Party left me”? If we play fast and loose with the issues that drive voters to our party we may be hearing them say the same thing about us. We cannot afford that..

11. Just for the record. It’s for info. I read in Columbus only, medicade ADDED 4000 NEW signess…That ONE county only….Now, do the math on the taxes and burden WE as NC taxpayers just assumed.

    Again, Dallas, you can tout and resoundly celebrate THIS Gen Assembly; I choose not to.

Comments are closed.